Michael (michka) Kaplan <michka at trigeminal dot com> wrote: > Could we please declare a moratorium on all of this nonsense --- > er, considered debate ---for a little while, and talk about Unicode, > instead?
I wouldn't quite go so far in claiming that the (overlapping) PUA and Phaistos threads are all that far off-topic, as long as they stick to the principles of what things are appropriate for Unicode and how those things would be encoded. Actually I am enjoying the discussion over how to handle certain poorly-attested features in Phaistos like directionality and glyph reversing. The same issues would arise if the script *were* going to be encoded in Unicode, but then they would probably only be discussed on the Unicore list. This way I get a little window on what the process is like. Think about the typical "Unicode-related" mail this list gets: "How can I force UTF-8 into <database server> when it doesn't want to fit?" "Unicode is inadequate to cover <script> because it doesn't separately encode <glyph variant>." "Why can't I view <script> on my browser? Is it because Unicode sucks?" Are the current threads really worse? I wish we could see some nice discussions about the scripts and characters that are supposed to be added to Unicode 4.0, like Limbu, Tai Le, Ugaritic, hexagrams, etc. But that hasn't happened yet (at least not here) and 4.0 isn't due out for another year, so we may be stuck with the topics we have. -Doug Ewell Fullerton, California
